Pros and Cons of a MUH Disclosure Law
What is it?
disclosure law in multiunit housing requires the property owner or manager to
disclose whether smoking is allowed, where it is allowed, etc. A number
of states and municipalities have passed them, but no studies have come out yet
to indicate their effectiveness in increasing the significant number of
laws do nothing to stop drifting smoke in MUHs.
may not lead to significant policy change. In Colorado there
was once a disclosure law requiring restaurants to tell their customers if
smoking was allowed in the restaurant (CCIA before 2006). That didn't
compel restaurants or bars to make the entire restaurant smoke-free or have
no-smoking sections. They would
just put up the signs and kept allowing smoking and the law also slowed our
efforts to obtain stronger laws.
could slow down efforts to implement stronger legislated policies at the local
level because legislators and the public feel the problem has been taken care
they do not lead to policy change are they worth putting all the effort into
landlords may oppose additional legal requirements due to the additional
may be concerned about liability issues that may result from not changing their
no-smoking policies even though they are not required.
may be a bad PR opportunity (and a bad strategic move) if your state or
community norms have not changed sufficiently to the point where the
community agrees and supports a disclosure law.
makes landlords aware that no-smoking policies are legal.
the process of notifying residents of the no-smoking policy housing providers
may realize there is a market niche for smoke-free housing and that most
residents prefer it.
good for potential residents/owners and can empower them to make informed
decisions about where they want to live.
is probably easier to pass than other legislated policies for smoke-free
housing and may help lead to stronger policies.
may be more supportive of such policies than other more restrictive laws
requiring them to make their buildings smoke-free.
may be a good PR opportunity.
may lead to policy change.
concerns seem to outweigh the benefits due to the potential repercussions. Why put so much time, energy, and
resources into working on something that may not lead to significant policy
change and hinder your efforts down the road to get a strong ordinance that requires
MUH to have no-smoking policies?